Project 2025

[Dill]

(06-18-2024, 05:39 PM)samhain Wrote: If this actually managed to get through, then most of the issues being discussed here are hardly the point.

Enhancing one party's power on a more permanent basis through the executive is more or less putting the current power of the EO on steroids.  Executive orders are, at this point, wielded very heavy-handedly by every single president that takes office.  It's probably not a great practice, but it truly has become a case where both sides literally do it.

What makes these changes (EOs) somewhat tolerable is their temporary nature.  If people dislike them enough, they can put another guy in in 4 years to draft a whole new slate of changes that may or may not last beyond that administration.  Presidents have campaign promises to keep and optics to promote, so I get the temporary circumventing of the legislature for instant gratification.   fundamental change to how our government operates.

Some great points here. 

Speaking to the first bolded, it's not clear that the Trump et al. can accomplish these sweeping changes. This goes way beyond EOs to an attempt to literally reshape government institutions from the ground up in ways that make the changes permanent. Think of the varieties of chaos--regulatory, legislative, foreign policy, school policy, immigration, etc.--that would come down on the nation all at once across many different policy areas. Confusion and resistance would be the order of the day. Trump's desired response to the protests generated would further increase resistance. He had adults around him last time around, hemming him. He'll know not to pick them this time around. So I don't think implementation can be successful. Best case scenario (for them) is to get if partially done before resistance in and outside government becomes too much. It's likely that, as a matter of self-preservation, Trump would stop at some point before the Heritage Foundation can declare "mission accomplished."

As to the second bolded, the prominence of EOs has more to do with Congressional gridlock than anything. There comes a point where, in order to govern, presidents must turn to the EO as a stop gap. 

(06-18-2024, 05:39 PM)samhain Wrote: Trying to be as non partisan as possible here, I'll list why I think this is a huge mistake for any administration or party:  There's always a reaction.  Especially in the current climate.  Any attempt to ban abortion federally will be met with fierce opposition at the polls as will any attempt to ban gay marriage.  I don't feel like this is entirely understood by people who keep working against those things, yet oddly I think Trump himself understands the impact well enough.  

The big issue here is the only question you should ever ask when your party wants to enact sweeping change or enhance the power of one executive:  what would the other side do with this power once this precendent is set?  Would each side significantly re-shape the federal government with the election of a new president?  I don't see why they wouldn't.  I also don't see why they wouldn't continue to go even farther as the practiced continued.  One day there's going to be someone in there, with this power, that you don't trust or like.  That guy is now going to be even more powerful.

As I stated above, Project 2025 is not going to be like changing a few EOs. If Trump wins and seeks to implement the Project, I'm betting the counter reaction will be more like traditional conservatism--restore the balance and function of institutions that were hundreds of years in the making. People will be SICK of radical restructuring of all parts of the executive branch all at once. Biden won campaigning for a "return to normalcy"; whoever follows Trump will have an even better case. 

I get your question. It would apply to, say, getting rid of the filibuster or refusing to hold a confirmation of a SCOTUS appointee. But those are really localized disturbances; they don't involve 10s of thousands of people losing their jobs, leaving a vacuum of regulatory oversight and guidance as "true believers" step into government offices deciding what the new rules are with Trump's blessing. 

(06-18-2024, 05:39 PM)samhain Wrote: The executive branch is not intended to be any more or less powerful than the legislative or judicial.  Any back door attempt to throw this out of balance is a fundamental change to how our government operates.

Pretty sure the legislative is intended to be more powerful than the other two branches.  One goal of Project 2025 is undo traditional checks on presidential power. They are reviving the "Unitary Executive" concept, popularized under Bush II by neocons like Cheney. Another step to autocracy if they are successful.